alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 130 (Wednesday, July 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18133]



[[Page 36927]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel, Comparative Medicine (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Date: July 14, 1998.
    Time: 11:00 am to 12:00 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Office of Review, National Center for Research Resources, 
6705 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Bela J. Gulyas, PhD, Director, Office of Review, 
National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of 
Health, 6705 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7965, Room 6018, Bethesda, MD 
20892, 301-435-0811.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine, 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333; 
93.371, Biomedical Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 29, 1998.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-18133 Filed 7-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 11



                        Exolon-ESK Company and Subsidiaries
                         Computation of Earnings Per Share
                       (In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)

                                                          Years Ended
                                                          December 31,

                                                     1996    1995    1994

          Net Income                               $6,080  $3,462  $1,516
                                                        
          Less Preferred Stock Dividends:                        

               Series A                              (16)    (22)    (22)

               Series B                              (16)    (22)    (22)
          Undistributed income                     $6,048  $3,418  $1,472
                                                        

          Net income attributable to:

               Common Stock (50.0%)                $3,024  $1,709    $736
                                                        
               Class A Common Stock (50.0%)        $3,024  $1,709    $736
                                                        

                                                   $6,048  $3,418  $1,472
                                                        

          Net earnings per share of Common
          Stock:                                    $6.27   $3.55   $1.53
               Primary
               Fully Diluted                        $6.05   $3.44   $1.50

          Net earnings per share of Class A
          Common Stock:
               Primary                              $5.90   $3.33   $1.44


               Fully Diluted                        $5.70   $3.24   $1.42

          Weighted Average Shares Outstanding:
               Primary:

                    Common Stock                 482,000  482,000 482,000
                                                      
                    Class A Common Stock         513,000  513,000 513,000

               Fully Diluted:

                    Common Stock                 504,000  504,000 504,000
                                                     
                    Class A Common Stock         535,000  535,000 535,000
EXHIBIT 23.1






CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM






We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. on Form S-8 (No. 333-167175) and related prospectuses as well as the Registration Statement of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. on Form S-3 (No. 333-165733) of our audit report dated July 14, 2011, with respect to the financial statements of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc., which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. for the years ended April 30, 2011 and 2010.






CHERRY, BEKAERT & HOLLAND, L.L.P.






/s/ Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, L.L.P.




Raleigh, North Carolina


July 14, 2011
----

----

| 1. | the                quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Falcon Ridge Development Inc.                for the                period ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the                requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange                Act of                1934; and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Falcon                Ridge Development Inc.,. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|        |
|--------|
|   |   |   |
|   |   |

|                                        |                                                          |                                     |
|---------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                                        |                                                          |
|                                   |                                                     |                                |
| Dated August                  14, 2006 |                                                          | /s/ Karen                  Y. Duran |
|                                        | Karen                    Y. Duran,                            |
|                                        | Chief                    Financial                    Officer |

----

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SILVIA VICTORIA ORTEGA BAUTISTA; e t al.,

Petitioners,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 23

- 366

Agency No s

. A215

- 815

- 035
A215

- 815

- 036
A215

- 815

- 037
A215

- 815

- 038

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted November 14, 2023 **

Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges

.

Silvia Victoria Ortega Bautista and her three minor children

, native s and

citizen s of Mexico , petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration

Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge ’s decision

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

NOV 22 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 366

denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection

under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings.

Conde Quevedo v. Barr , 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the

petition for review.

We do not disturb the agency’s determination that petitioner s failed to

establish they suffered harm that rises to the level of persecution. See

See Nagoulko v. INS , 333 F.3d 1012, 1016

- 17 (9th Cir. 2003) (discrimination and

harassment did not rise to the level of persecution) ; see also Flores Molina v.

Garland , 37 F.4th 626, 633 n.2 (9th Cir. 2022) (court need not resolve whether de

novo or substantial evidence review applies, where result would be the same under

either standard)

. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that

petitioner s failed to establish a reasonable possibility of future persecution. See

Nagoulko , 333 F.3d at 1018 (possibility of future persecution “too speculative”).

Because petitioner s failed to establish eligibility for asylum, they failed to satisfy

the standard for withholding of removal. See Villegas Sanchez v. Garland , 990

F.3d 1173, 1183 (9th Cir. 2021). Thus, petitioners’ asylum and withholding of

removal claims fail.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection

because petitioner s failed to show it is more likely than not they will be tortured by3 23

- 366

or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See

Aden v. Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009)

.

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
# C_2013344EN.01005902.xml

| 23.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 344/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 344/59

---

Action brought on 9 September 2013 — Lumene v OHIM (THE YOUTH EXPERTS)

(Case T-484/13)

2013/C 344/109

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Lumene Oy (Espoo, Finland) (represented by: L. Laaksonen, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 26 June 2013 given in Case R 187/2013-2. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 26 June 2013 given in Case R 187/2013-2.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘THE YOUTH EXPERTS’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 44 — International registration No 1 112 578 designating the European Union

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Refused the application for registration

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(2) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
**Exhibit 10.24****2007 Chief Executive Officer Incentive Plan Summary**The bonus for the CEO is determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors,following the principles and process articulated below.The Compensation Committee assesses performance against agreed-upon objectives in three dimensions:Financial, Talent Management/Organization Development, and Business Strategy & Operations. Thesethree dimensions, when viewed holistically, reflect firm-wide responsibility for consistentlycreating value for the owners of the enterprise over a sustained period of time.In addition to performance against objectives, the Compensation Committee reviews externalbenchmark data each year on total compensation practices for CEO and other executive-levelpositions, to ensure that total rewards for the executive suite strike an appropriate balance amongshareholder interest, recognition for achievement of business objectives, and retention of keyexecutive talent.The mechanics of the bonus plan for the CEO are described below:At the end of the performance period (calendar year), the Compensation Committee reviews the CEO’sself assessment, upward feedback obtained from his direct reports, and summary Board of Directorsfeedback. At its February meeting, the Committee discusses overall performance against the threedimensions of Financial Performance, Talent/OD, and Business Strategy & Operations, and assigns anoverall letter grade to the CEO’s performance. The amount of the bonus pay-out is then determinedas a percentage of the CEO’s base salary, using the following schedule as a directional guideline:       Letter Grade PayoutA    125% A-   110% B+  100% B      85% B-     70% C+    60% C      50%
CHRIS CHRISTIE Governor
KIM GUADAGNO Lt. Governor

John Filipelli, Director

### ~tate 

## of**~**

### efu 

## Werseu
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY Mail Code 401-02

P.O.Box420 Trenton, NJ 08625-0420

TEL (609) 292-6722 FAX (609) 633-8236

May 2, 2013

Clean Air & Sustainability Division United States Environmental ProtectionAgency

- Region 2 290 Broadway- 26th Floor New York, New York 10007-1866 Subject: Conditional Approval ofNewJersey's Section 110 SIP.
Dear Mr. Filipelli: BOB MARTIN Commissioner

This letter is in response to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) April 10, 2013 Federal Register notice (78 FR 21296) where it was proposed to "conditionally approve" certain elements ofNewJersey's Section 110 State Implementation Plan (Infrastructure SIP) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The USEPArequests that we provide certain information to make the Infrastructure SIP fully approvable. This includes information related to requirements on avoidance ofconflicts ofinterest, information related to county health agencies that assist the Department in enforcement ofthe Clean Air Act, and updated emergency criteria levels. Icommit to provide the requested information within one year ofthe USEPA's final action on the Infrastructure SIP.
ln addition to providing the requested information, New Jersey intends to submit an Infrastructure SIP that covers all pollutants for which the USEPAhas established a NAAQS. We expect that this will enable streamliningfuture infrastructure SIP submittals, with only the new or changed information addressed with each subsequent NAAQS change.
The USEPA's proposed disapproval ofSection 110(a)(2)(C) and Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the Infrastructure SIP because ofthe lack ofa stand-alone, state-adopted Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permittingprogram is unwarranted. A State with a federally delegated PSD program, like New Jersey, is not required to adopt a stand-alone State regulation when the Federal Implementation Plan currently in place delegates adequate PSD permitting authority to New Jersey. The USEPA'sproposed disapproval is confusing and unnecessary.

NewJersey is an Equal OpportunityEmployer'Printed on RecycledPaper andRecyclableThank you for your staffs cooperation in developingNewJersey's Infrastructure SIP elements. Should you have any technical questions on the Infrastructure SIP, please contact SharonDavis, Section Chieffor the Bureau ofAir Quality Planning, at (609) 292-6722.

Sincer

## I~

William O'Sullivan, Director Division ofAir Quality

CC: Richard Ruvo, United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 JohnRenella, Esq., NewJersey Deputy Attorney's General Jane Kozinski, NJDEP WolfSkacel, NJDEP Ed Choromanski, NJDEP Chris Salmi, NJDEP Sharon Davis, NJDEP Ray Papalski, NJDEP Official SIP files
No. 11M17.

#### David Lynd, Petitioner v. McDonald’s Corporation.

565 U.S. 808, 132 S. Ct. 78,

181 L. Ed. 2d 11,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6873.

October 3, 2011.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.

Same case below, 420 Fed. Appx. 348.
Exhibit 99







Certificate of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

of

American Community Properties Trust

(pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350)



I, J. Michael Wilson, Chief Executive Officer, and I, Cynthia L. Hedrick, Chief Financial Officer, of American Community Properties Trust, certify that, to the best of our knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Community Properties Trust for the quarter ended June 30, 2002, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (i) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of American Community Properties Trust..





/s/ J. Michael Wilson							J. Michael Wilson

Chief Executive Officer

August 14, 2002





/s/ Cynthia L. Hedrick							Cynthia L. Hedrick

Chief Financial Officer

August 14, 2002
----

Exhibit 32.1

**OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Envirokare Tech, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, George Kazantzis, President (President and Principal Financial Officer) and Louis F. Savelli (Chief Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,

That the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate on this 10th day of November 2006.

|   |  /s/ George Kazantzis                                           |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                      |
|   | George Kazantzis           President and Principal Financial Officer |

|   |  /s/ Louis F. Savelli                               |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                          |
|   | Louis F. Savelli            Chief Executive Officer |
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
HEADQUARTERS
8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, SUITE 2533
FT. BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060-6221

IN REPLY
REFER TO DLMSO

DEC 02 2002

MEMORANDUM FOR: SEE DISTRIBUTION

SUBJECT: Approved DLMS Change (ADC) 84, Deletion of Navy Activity (RIC N44) Authorized to
Submit Logistics Asset Support Estimate (LASE) Requests (Supply/MILSTRAP)

This approved change revises DoD 4000.25-M, Defense Logistics Management System, and
DoD 4000.25-2-M, Military Standard Transaction Reporting and Accounting Procedures
(MILSTRAP) to delete a Navy activity formerly authorized to submit LASE requests. Navy has
advised that Routing Identifier Code N44 should be deleted from MILSTRAP, Chapter 14, section
C14.8, list of Navy activities authorized to submit LASE requests. Request the Services and Agencies
advise their design centers of this change. This change will be published in Change 2 to MILSTRAP.
The corresponding DLMS change will be published in Change 1 to the reissue of the DLMS manual.
The reissue of the DLMS manual is in the final publication stages. .

Addressees may direct questions to the DLMSO point of contact Ms. Mary Jane Johnson,
703-767-0677, DSN 427, email: maryjane_johnson@hq.dla.mil. Others must contact their
Component designated Supply Process Review Committee representative (refer to:
http://www.dla.mil/j-6/dimso/Committees.)

“YL Garmea of foes —
(AMES A. JO) ON
i / Director /

Defense Logistics Management

Standards Office
DISTRIBUTION:
SUPPLY PROCESS REVIEW COMMITTEE:
USA AMCOPS-SL-SA/CASCOM ISD GSA FLAM
USN NAVSUP 4C2B4/NAVICP M0411 FAA AFZ 500
USAF AFMC LGIA/HQSSG ILSPR NIMA STD 101
USMC LPC-3 DAASC-SL.
DLA J-3322/J-3731 DSCA PPP
DTRA CSNLCM
ce:
ADUSD(L)SCI
USCG G SLP
NSA S711

USTC TCJ4 LTS
**DoD 4000.25-2-M**

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP3.28. APPENDIX 3.28**

**WAR MATERIEL REQUIREMENTS DATA**

## 

**AP3.28-**

AP3.28-1

APPENDIX 3.28
EXHIBIT 11.2
		      ETHYL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
		 COMPUTATION OF PRO-FORMA EARNINGS PER SHARE
	     for the years ended December 31, 1995, 1994 and 1993
		   (In thousands except per share amounts)



At the close of business on February 28, 1994, Ethyl completed the spin-off
of its wholly owned subsidiary Albemarle, in the form of a tax-free stock
dividend.  Following the spin-off, Albemarle owns directly or indirectly,
the olefins and derivatives, bromine chemicals and specialty chemical
business formerly owned directly or indirectly by the Company.  As a result
of the aforementioned distribution, the Company believes that the following
pro forma financial information is important to enable the reader to obtain
a meaningful understanding of the Company's results of operations.  The pro
forma information is presented to illustrate the estimated effects of the
distribution of Albemarle on Ethyl on a stand-alone basis and may not
necessarily reflect the future results of operations of Ethyl or what the
earnings or results of operations of Ethyl would have been had Albemarle
operated as a separate, independent company.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

						      1995       1994       1993
<S>                                                  <C>        <C>        <C>
Pro-forma income before extraordinary item and
   discontinued insurance operations                 $73,963    $91,479    $74,176
						     =======    =======    =======

Average number of shares of common stock outstanding 118,436    118,427    118,382

Shares issuable upon the assumed exercise of
   outstanding stock options (1)                          10         24         54
						     -------    -------    -------
Shares of common stock and common stock
   equivalents (1) (2)                               118,446    118,451    118,436
						     =======    =======    =======

Pro-forma earnings per share: (3)
   Income before extraordinary item and
      discontinued insurance operations                $0.62      $0.78      $0.63
						     =======    =======    =======

Notes:

(1)   For fully-diluted earnings per share, the shares issuable upon the assumed exercise of
outstanding stock options would be 11, 26, and 58 in 1995, 1994, and 1993, respectively, and
the shares of common stock equivalents would have been 118,447, 118,453, and 118,440,
respectively.

(2)   To determine the average number of shares of common stock and common stock equivalents,
the average number of common shares and common stock equivalents outstanding (actual or
assumed for equivalents) during each month were added together and the sum was then divided
by 12.

(3)   Primary earnings per share and fully-diluted earnings per share are the same amounts.

</TABLE>